In the May 2012 issue of magazine Experience L!fe, there is an article called “Have It Your Way- Defying convention can be incredibly satisfying. But it can also invite a whole lot of trouble.”

Interesting. He had me at the title.

The article’s author, Bahram Akrandi, writes, “Anytime you choose to break trail…it takes a certain amount of energy and focus to maintain your momentum…When it comes to selecting your defining moments of difference, you have to know how to choose your battles. And I’d argue, that in general, your best change efforts will be focused on those areas where you see a real and serious need for improvement over the current reality.”

“This is true in the realms of business, government and community, as well as in our personal lives. Think about it: If a product, service or policy is just not good enough, it makes sense to innovate, to call for improvement. If a family dynamic is dysfunctional, it makes sense to move beyond that system, or advocate for change within it. But to actively mess with something that’s working reasonably well often backfires, and creates more trouble than its worth.”

The author then goes on to list three things to consider “…to anyone trying to decide whether “going rogue” is really worth all the trouble.”

The first consideration is your values.” Does the effort in question speak to your most basic principles and priorities?…If your goal isn’t rooted in your core values, explore what your driving motivations are, and where they are coming from. Undertaking a rebellion because you are bored, annoyed or trying to get back at someone for petty reasons is usually a bad idea. Look for another, more constructive way forward.”

The second consideration is your intentions. “Are you trying to make a significant difference in what you see as an important issue? Or do you just want to shake things up a bit, take the world by surprise, perhaps express your uniqueness somehow? …Consider whether you have the strength and determination to carry out your intended efforts alone, or whether you might need to build a coalition of support.”

The third consideration is unintended consequences. “When you elect to “go your own way,” the people and systems around you may benefit enormously, but they often wind up paying a price, too. Change is disruptive. Conflict is exhausting. So take a moment to think about beyond yourself and your own priorities to contemplate how your choices might affect your family, friends, coworkers or community – for better or worse. Consider what you might be putting at risk in the name of your quest, and whether you (and they) can live with both the best-and worst- case scenarios.”

This article got me thinking about so-called radicals I know within our church. When I was a teenager I lived in a ward that had a sister who was radically anti-porn. She organized the YW to have an activity of picketing a local porn shop. Only the girls, not the YM. It was horribly embarrassing to me, as a 14 year old girl still in shock at the changes my own body was making, to have to go stand in front of a sex shop holding protest signs, while considering the more horrifying indecencies possibly happening inside. That sister was married and had a boatload of kids. She had an office right off the kitchen that had a separate phone, copy machine, maps of all the porn shops in the state, and stacks of pornographic magazines so she could demonstrate the awfulness allowed under the first Amendment. I am convinced her zeal to rid the world of all sexual ugliness had to have affected her children. At the very least, her sex life with her own husband.

Rob and I have lived in a wards that enjoyed zealots who were convinced that only boys who achieved their Eagle rank in scouting would go to the Celestial Kingdom, others who were so obsessed with the tribulations before the Second Coming that they turned even the most innocent ward gathering into lectures on how to survive nuclear blasts and exhortations to stockpile toilet paper. And don’t forget the person convinced of the need to personally do the temple work of every human being who ever lived on the planet so no one would accost them in the next life, demanding to know why they have been stuck in the eternal waiting room because we were so selfish as to sit on the couch and watch stupid cable tv when we should have been saving souls.

The internet has been the blessing/curse that has spawned an explosion of knowledge about church history, increased discussions about the male -only priesthood, church policy on same-sex marriage, and every other minutia about church policy. It has also brought out the imbalances of life that can occur when one tiny part of the gospel becomes the number one priority of focus. I loved it when in the last General Conference President Uchdorft acknowledged that the topic of his talk came from a mother who wrote to him asking him to speak about forgiveness because she has children who aren’t speaking to each other. Can you imagine what would happen if every member of the church wrote church headquarters asking that their personal pet subject be addressed in the next General Conference? Who knows, maybe people already do to that. It worked for that sister.

You know my personal gripes: Wards that don’t let women give the opening prayer in Sacrament Meeting and the church handbook policy against cremation at death. At times I have considered writing letters and starting blogs about my pet peeves because dang it, they are wrong and this nonsense needs to change. So far I haven’t done either. All I have done is rant online on Mormon blogs, in the hopes that would be enough because A. Women giving the opening prayer isn’t a core value for me. I can sleep at night knowing I will currently only be asked to prayerfully close Sacrament meeting, not open it. B. I do want to change this stupid unwritten policy, but C. I’m not willing to deal with the unintended consequences of being “that feminist woman who sees conspiracy wherever she looks.” I want to be admired for being “that smart, sassy chick who works subversively in ways that cannot be described and who wears pretty necklaces.”

Call me shallow and unmotivated. I prefer to think of myself as not wasting precious energy on things that, in the end, don’t really matter.

I’ve learned that the only way to be known as “that smart, sassy chick who works subversively in ways that cannot be described and who wears pretty necklaces” requires either a calling of your own in high places or a husband who is a member of the bishopric. Plus, a stockpile of pretty necklaces.

Otherwise you have to complain to someone you don’t see on a daily basis.

This is an important post, LIZ, for many reasons. I think any time contention enters a situation, it has to be worth it. I say that because I’ve fought for so many things only to win an argument without winning anything else. Any effort has to be reasonably made. I saw this when I was looking into a judge for a column I did once. I spent weeks at the courthouse. What I was surprised to find is that there was very little drama. Quiet discussions and compromise. None of the LA Law stuff. Gave me pause because I always thought I’d be a good lawyer because I’m good at debate.

Debate, I guess, in an Abraham Lincoln world, accomplishes something. But slow and steady and reasonable probably does more. We all get our pet projects and callings and some of us are more overbearing than others. The furthering of contention as you describe it is one way Satan uses good things to draw people away from the Lord.

On the other hand, where we be without womens sufferage or the civil rights movement? Sigh….life is just such a crap shoot.

Oh, in my ward, women now give the opening prayer regularly. I griped and griped and griped about that. I do think I made them more aware. Of me. It’s kind of funny because some women will say “did you notice I said the opening prayer, Arlene?” It all started because I hate to pray in public and wanted to give the opening prayer and get it over with so I could relax in the meeting.

There is no “church policy in the handbook” that forbids cremation at death. (I suspect that cremation before death is covered in the sections on murder or euthanasia.) My father, who served as a bishop, a stake president, a mission president twice, and in his professional life was a vice president of BYU during most of the Holland years, wanted his body cremated. And it was. And Elder Holland had no problem in coming to speak at the funeral.

Cremation is clean and efficient and cheap (although be aware that some crematories charge more for people who weigh over 300 lbs–it takes more fuel to dispose of all that flesh!).

Howard, just trying to be concise in my writing. I could have listed every church topic that differing opinions are held on, but I was trying to not write a book.

Mark B., Not my understanding at all. It was in the old church handbook and I saw it myself in the new one. It sounds like your dad was a death rebel and got what he wanted. I’m doing the same for myself. I just don’t want to hear how cremation is discouraged in the church handbook. I think that part of the new manual should have deleted.

Annegb, You always make me smile. I love that your campaign accomplished good for all while also fulfilling your personal (#1) core value of not being miserable suffering from anxiety about public prayer. Too smart.

Members who become obsessed with their one part of the gosple are like Amway couples…you may like them tremendously, but you know if you stand still long enough around them you’re going to have to hear something about it.

I’m not sure where the ‘No women giving opening prayers comes from, it must be at either your Stake or Ward direction. I know at one time there was that direction from Church headquarters, but I believe it was changed after just a year or two. The Sisters give opening prayers all the time in our Branch.

“The Church does not normally encourage cremation. The family of the deceased must decide whether the body should be cremated, taking into account any laws governing burial or cremation. In some countries, the law requires cremation.

Where possible, the body of a deceased member who has been endowed should be dressed in temple clothing when it is cremated. A funeral service may be held (see 18.6).”

Church Handbook 2 21.3.2.

So it sounds like the church (very softly) discourages cremation in most cases, at least within the U.S. and other countries where burial is common. Frankly, I think that approach is rather silly, but…

Don’t you think eventually cremation will be the only option? It seems we’ll eventually run out of land.

I have this great idea. Maybe I’ve told it before. I think we should make a big industry on shooting our garbage at the sun. Win-win. If anybody uses this idea, you heard it here first. I want royalties or something.

My big idea (one probably worth causing trouble for) is required postage stamp placement of all bar codes on packages. I am sick of heaving 50 lbs. bags of whatever up onto the stupid counter because the barcode is on the bottom. All items, including clothing, should have barcodes uniformly located in the upper right hand corner of the item,just like a postage stamp. It would save my back and tons of time and aggravation searching for the @#$%!*! barcode.

If anyone works for the government or Wal-mart and has to power to make this happen, I am happy to waive my rights for having this common sense idea and you can keep the bonus for yourself. I don’t want money, I just want the friggin’ cashier lines to move.

We’ve already been down this road discussing cremation. The previous discussion appears to have made no impression, But to repeat: “does not not normally encourage” is not the same as “discourage” in my opinion. Plus, why get upset about something that is allowed, even if it is “not normally encouraged”? If you want to be cremated, you can be cremated. What more do you want, an endorsement from the first presidency?

The idea that there are apparently some wards that do not ask women to give opening prayers in SM is weird, but it seems to be dying out, so I don’t think you need to protest over that either.

MCQ- You are right. I will work on that. Apparently my habit of publicly avoiding Big Topics, like women not holding the priesthood, inequity of spending between YW/YM programing, how the church spends/invests it money, Same-sex relationships, etc. because I, in my little world, cannot do a darn thing about them, just isn’t interesting enough for you. I apologize for being so boring.
Meanwhile, in my neck of the woods, women not being allowed to open Sacrament meeting with prayer IS still alive and well.
And I just dealt with two funerals this month where the stupid church handbook was quoted about cremation. In one instance there wasn’t enough money to do a burial and the family now has to make payments for their loved ones final resting spot, all because someone reminded the family “the church says don’t cremate.” It irritated the heck of out me that was even a concern and now people are in debt. And no, there wasn’t enough life insurance to cover a burial because if you are unlucky enough to get sick when you are young, you can’t buy affordable insurance to pay for the burial that Jesus wants you to have. If you remember, even He couldn’t afford to bury himself. He borrowed a friends crypt.

So what if the church handbook was quoted? It doesn’t say you can’t cremate! And if the family’s wishes are to do cremation, then cremation it is. How is it possible to stop a family from doing cremation if that’s what they choose? The simple fact is that the church doesn’t say “don’t cremate.”

I liked the post a lot. It is difficult to decide what things are really the big important ones because the little ones are the ones that really get under a person’s skin, like why do all the sacrament meeting talks have to be based on a conference talk. Can’t people speak for themselves. And does anyone besides me care that Sunday school lesson are like watching grass grow. I just can’t find time to advocate for equal treatment with men or care about same sex marriage issues. As far as cremation goes, I think that is a personal choice.

Mcq, sounds like a home teacher or relative was thinking of previous editions of the chi, and no one thought to check the current edition. then the papers for the burial plot were signed before anyone with knowledge of current CHI was informed of what was going on. then it was too late.

We see this type of story a lot in the nacle, where old policy is still promulgated thru ignorance, old people thought the (old) policy was doctrine, no no one thought to check to see what current/new policy might be.

I think LIZ’s over arching topic is gospel hobbies, which are bad, because we need to embrace the whole gospel, and have a balance. I think it was Elder Oaks who repeated BRM’s admonition against gospel hobbies. And I am guilty because book-slinging is a gospel hobby for me. And I have not submitted family genealogy for temple work in a long time.

There might be times for a “campaign”, like Prop 8, or “I am a Mormon”, where we all get on board at the same time, but those concentrations of effort are temporary. a full time mission is a full time, but temporary, concentration of effort.

But it turns out that that one sister’s concern with pr0n was prescient, even if she did go overboard in her campaign.

There really IS a lot of important stuff for us to do, a lot of high priority stuff, but we need to balance it out: spouse, kids, family, job, church callings, temple work, genealogy, sharing gospel/missionary work, food storage, daily reading of scriptures, family home evening, daily prayer, monthy fasting, education, community service, staying out of debt, saving for retirement, etc.

Our former bishop had women saying opening prayers and giving the last talk in Sac mtg. At least one Sunday there were only women speakers. I’ll have to pay better attention to see if that’s regressed with our new bishop.